Results
Held-out test split, 1,000 examples never seen in training.
Table with columns: Model, Exact match, Token F1, Format compliance| Model | Exact match | Token F1 | Format compliance |
|---|
| Base, 0-shot (4-bit) | 49.7% | 0.925 | 26.7% |
| Base, 3-shot (4-bit) | 52.3% | 0.921 | 99.3% |
| QLoRA fine-tuned | 74.8% | 0.973 | 99.9% |
| Delta vs 0-shot | +25.1 pts | +0.049 | +73.2 pts |
Fine-tuning improved exact match by +25.1 points (49.7% -> 74.8%), a +51% relative gain.
Usage
The model expects the chat template with this system prompt — it was trained with it, and
accuracy drops without it.
import torch
from transformers import AutoModelForCausalLM, AutoTokenizer
from peft import PeftModel
base = AutoModelForCausalLM.from_pretrained("Qwen/Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct", dtype=torch.float16, device_map="auto")
model = PeftModel.from_pretrained(base, "blaze-star/qwen2.5-1.5b-sql-qlora")
tok = AutoTokenizer.from_pretrained("blaze-star/qwen2.5-1.5b-sql-qlora")
SYSTEM = ("You are a text-to-SQL engine. Given a SQLite schema and a question, reply with a "
"single SQL query that answers the question. Output only the SQL query: no "
"explanation, no comments, no markdown code fences.")
schema = "CREATE TABLE head (age INTEGER)"
question = "How many heads of the departments are older than 56?"
messages = [
{"role": "system", "content": SYSTEM},
{"role": "user", "content": f"Schema:\n{schema}\n\nQuestion: {question}\n\nSQL:"},
]
prompt = tok.apply_chat_template(messages, tokenize=False, add_generation_prompt=True)
ids = tok(prompt, return_tensors="pt").to(model.device)
out = model.generate(**ids, max_new_tokens=96, do_sample=False)
print(tok.decode(out[0][ids["input_ids"].shape[1]:], skip_special_tokens=True))
Use greedy decoding (do_sample=False). Sampling hurts exact match on this task.
What the metric actually measures
Primary metric is normalized exact match against the dataset's reference SQL:
lowercased, whitespace collapsed, " unified to ', backticks/brackets stripped,
spacing normalized around operators and punctuation. It is strict — a semantically
equivalent query that differs in alias naming (AS p vs AS T1) or literal quoting
(= '15' vs = 15) counts as a miss.
That strictness is the point, but it must be read correctly: the base model already
produces largely correct SQL content (token F1 0.925 before any training).
Much of the headroom is conformance to this dataset's canonical SQL style, which is
exactly what task-specific fine-tuning buys you. To keep that claim honest this project
reports three separate baselines rather than one:
Table with columns: Baseline, Exact match, Format compliance, What it controls for| Baseline | Exact match | Format compliance | What it controls for |
|---|
| 4-bit, 0-shot | 49.7% | 26.7% | matched conditions — same quantization the adapter trains on |
| 4-bit, 3-shot | 52.3% | 99.3% | isolates output formatting from SQL convention |
| fp16, 0-shot | 57.3% | 99.4% | strongest untrained configuration |
The 3-shot baseline is the important control. Three in-context examples raise format
compliance to 99.3% — the model stops wrapping output in markdown fences almost
entirely — yet exact match moves only to 52.3%. Formatting was therefore not the
bottleneck, and gains above that line are genuine SQL-convention learning, not
prompt-format cleanup.
Both models receive an identical prompt and identical output post-processing
(fence stripping, leading-prose removal, first-statement extraction), so neither is
advantaged by the harness. Secondary metrics: order-insensitive token F1 over SQL
tokens (partial credit) and format compliance (fraction of raw generations that were
already bare SQL).
Data and leakage control
b-mc2/sql-create-context — natural-language question +
CREATE TABLE schema -> SQLite query.
The 78,577 raw rows are deduplicated on a SHA-1 of the normalized
(question, schema) pair (4 exact duplicates dropped), shuffled with seed
42, and then test is carved off first, before val and train. Splits:
12,000 train / 750 val / 1,000 test.
Split disjointness is asserted at build time and recorded in
data/split_report.json:
{"train_test_overlap": 0, "val_test_overlap": 0, "train_val_overlap": 0}
prepare_data.py raises if any of these is non-zero, so a leaking split cannot be
trained on. The test split was used only by evaluate.py, never by train.py.
Training
Table | |
|---|
| Base model | Qwen/Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct |
| Method | QLoRA — frozen 4-bit NF4 base (double quant, bf16 compute) + LoRA adapters |
| LoRA | r=16, alpha=32, dropout=0.05, on q,k,v,o,gate,up,down_proj |
| Trainable params | 18.5M of 1.56B (1.18%) |
| Optimizer | paged AdamW 8-bit, lr 0.0002, cosine schedule, 3% warmup, grad-clip 0.3 |
| Effective batch | 32 (16 x 2 accumulation) |
| Epochs |
Loss is computed only on the assistant turn, so the model is never rewarded for
reproducing the schema or the question.

Quantization: latency, VRAM, and quality
Merged fp16 model re-quantized with bitsandbytes and benchmarked on the same A100.
Latency is a single request generating exactly 64 tokens (20 runs after 3 warmups);
quality is exact match on the first 300 test examples.
Table with columns: Precision, Weights VRAM, Peak VRAM, Latency (bs=1, 64 tok), Decode tok/s, Batch-16 tok/s, Exact match| Precision | Weights VRAM | Peak VRAM | Latency (bs=1, 64 tok) | Decode tok/s | Batch-16 tok/s | Exact match |
|---|
| fp16 | 3.09 GB | 3.3 GB | 1862.4 ms | 34.4 | 436.5 | 76.7% (n=300) |
| 8bit | 1.8 GB | 2.1 GB | 27963.2 ms | 2.3 | 16.7 |
Limitations
- Single-table, synthetic-ish schemas.
sql-create-context schemas are small
CREATE TABLE statements derived from WikiSQL/Spider. Performance will not transfer
directly to large multi-table production warehouses.
- Exact match is style-sensitive. A correct query written in a different but valid
style scores zero. Token F1 is reported alongside for this reason.
- No execution-based evaluation. Queries are compared as strings, not run against a
database, so semantic equivalence is undercounted.
- 4-bit inference costs accuracy. The base model loses ~8 points of exact match
going from fp16 to 4-bit (57.3% -> 49.7%); see the quantization table for the
fine-tuned model's own fp16/8-bit/4-bit spread.
- English only, and the model emits SQLite dialect.
Intended use
Converting natural-language questions into SQLite queries over small, explicitly-provided
schemas — a component inside a larger system that supplies the schema and validates or
sandboxes the generated query. Do not execute generated SQL against a production
database without validation; the model can emit syntactically valid queries that are
semantically wrong.
Training code
Full, reproducible pipeline: https://github.com/harshb20/qwen2.5-1.5b-sql-qlora
Citation
@misc{qwen25-1.5b-sql-qlora,
title = {QLoRA text-to-SQL fine-tune of Qwen2.5-1.5B-Instruct},
author = {harshb20},
year = {2026},
url = {https://github.com/harshb20/qwen2.5-1.5b-sql-qlora}
}